Posted on 10/24/2015 5:28:13 PM PDT by Elderberry
Congress is in a hurry to pass the information-sharing bill even as opposition continues to mount among tech companies, security experts, and privacy advocates
After spending months mired in the Senate, the latest incarnation of the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act (CISA) advanced to the floor this week and could face a vote as early as next week. The move to pass the CISPA rehash -- which the Obama administration has indicated it will sign -- comes despite mounting opposition from technology companies, security experts, and privacy advocates.
Although CISA is branded a cyber security bill, it does nothing to actually improve the effectiveness of security systems. It's concerned instead with increasing the amount of information that corporations share with government and protecting those companies from liability for violating customers' privacy. [ Read Bill Snyder's Tech's Bottom Line blog for what the key business trends mean to you. | Cut to the key news for technology development and IT management with the InfoWorld Daily newsletter, our summary of the top tech happenings. ]
As InfoWorld's David Linthicum has said, CISA "does not do what it claims (protect us from cyber attacks) but instead makes it easier for the government to spy on us electronically." Wired magazine gave the bill "An F for Security But an A+ for Spying."
In recent days, companies have been piling on to voice their opposition to the bill. Fight for the Future's Corporate Scorecard shows Google, Microsoft, Apple, Twitter, Yahoo, Amazon, and Dropbox among the 23 tech companies wanting to stop CISA. In addition, the Business Software Alliance and the Computer & Communications Industry Association oppose the bill's passage.
Security experts have spoken out against its weak privacy protections, overly broad monitoring, and allowance of defensive measures that could undermine cyber security. Even the Department of Homeland Security has said CISA is terrible, warning in a letter to Sen. Al Franken that it could harm privacy and increase "complexity and difficulty" in responding to cyber security threats.
"Our lawmakers' lack of understanding of cyber security isn't just embarrassing, it's dangerous. They should listen to the experts and abandon this hopelessly flawed bill," said Fight for the Future co-founder Tiffiniy Cheng.
InfoWorld's Bill Snyder wrote this week that Microsoft is at the forefront of tech companies' movement to protect users' privacy. And while "it's easy to be cynical and argue that Microsoft and other tech giants now lobbying for privacy have come to Jesus because the Edward Snowden revelations have made foreign customers wary of doing business with U.S. companies," the fact remains that Silicon Valley firms are standing strong on privacy.
Any candidate that ran on a platform of resetting A L L the laws in America to one day before Berry took office and the GOP became fully liberal would landslide the election.
So why won’t one?
Another link:
CISA Moves Forward: These 83 Senators Just Voted To Expand Surveillance
from the ridiculous dept
Well, it’s not a huge surprise that it moved forward, but the faux “cybersecurity” bill, which is actually a surveillance bill in disguise, CISA, has moved forward in the Senate via an overwhelming 83 to 14 vote. As we’ve discussed at length, while CISA is positioned as just a “voluntary” cybersecurity information sharing bill, it’s really none of those things. It’s not voluntary and it’s not really about cybersecurity. Instead, it’s a surveillance bill, that effectively gives the NSA greater access to information from companies in order to do deeper snooping through its upstream collection points. Even the attempts to supposedly “clarify” the language to protect data from being used for surveillance shows that the language is deliberately written to look like it does one thing, while really opening up the ability of the NSA and FBI to get much more information.
This is bad news, which is why nearly all of the tech/internet industry have come out against the bill. Apple, Twitter, Facebook, Google and more have spoken out against the bill in recent days, recognizing that at a time when they’re still trying to win back the trust of their users following the Snowden revelations, the last thing they need is for the US government to pass a new sneaky surveillance bill. But, apparently, 83 Senators chose not to listen. Here are the 83 Senators who just voted to increase surveillance and decrease trust in our internet companies, thereby harming the American economy and innovation:
Alexander (R-TN)
Ayotte (R-NH)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Bennet (D-CO)
Blumenthal (D-CT)
Blunt (R-MO)
Boozman (R-AR)
Boxer (D-CA)
Burr (R-NC)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Capito (R-WV)
Cardin (D-MD)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Cassidy (R-LA)
Coats (R-IN)
Cochran (R-MS)
Collins (R-ME)
Corker (R-TN)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Cotton (R-AR)
Crapo (R-ID)
Cruz (R-TX)
Daines (R-MT)
Donnelly (D-IN)
Durbin (D-IL)
Enzi (R-WY)
Ernst (R-IA)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Fischer (R-NE)
Flake (R-AZ)
Gardner (R-CO)
Gillibrand (D-NY)
Grassley (R-IA)
Hatch (R-UT)
Heinrich (D-NM)
Heitkamp (D-ND)
Heller (R-NV)
Hirono (D-HI)
Hoeven (R-ND)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Isakson (R-GA)
Johnson (R-WI)
Kaine (D-VA)
King (I-ME)
Kirk (R-IL)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Lankford (R-OK)
Lee (R-UT)
Manchin (D-WV)
McCain (R-AZ)
McCaskill (D-MO)
McConnell (R-KY)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Moran (R-KS)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Murphy (D-CT)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Perdue (R-GA)
Peters (D-MI)
Portman (R-OH)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Risch (R-ID)
Roberts (R-KS)
Rounds (R-SD)
Sasse (R-NE)
Schatz (D-HI)
Schumer (D-NY)
Scott (R-SC)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shaheen (D-NH)
Shelby (R-AL)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Sullivan (R-AK)
Tester (D-MT)
Thune (R-SD)
Tillis (R-NC)
Toomey (R-PA)
Warner (D-VA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wicker (R-MS)
There are some disappointing names on that list, including those like Heinrich who have spoken out against surveillance in the past, and those like Schumer and Moran who have both tried to position themselves as supportive of the internet industry. Yet here they just helped throw them under the bus.
The 14 principled votes against this bill are the following list, who should be thanked for taking a stand against expanded mass surveillance:
Baldwin (D-WI)
Booker (D-NJ)
Brown (D-OH)
Coons (D-DE)
Franken (D-MN)
Leahy (D-VT)
Markey (D-MA)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Merkley (D-OR)
Paul (R-KY)
Sanders (I-VT)
Udall (D-NM)
Warren (D-MA)
Wyden (D-OR)
Paul had introduced an amendment that sounded pretty straightforward, effectively requiring companies to adhere to their terms of service with customers and it, too, got overwhelmingly voted down. Senator Whitehouse’s really bad CFAA amendment got basically ditched (there was one tiny bit of language from it that was kept in which was basically fine). There’s a chance that more amendments could be voted on on Monday, but from the sound of it, none of them have a chance.
And now we have to worry about what will happen in conference when Congress tries to resolve differences between the House and Senate versions, and then see if the President signs the bill as well. Unfortunately, the Senate just did a really bad thing.
Interesting that the only ones who voted against it were all Dems, while the full Republican group voted for it. Something I’m missing here?
There go those heroic Republicans again, demonstrating their passion to reduce the size and scope of government, and their tireless vigilance as they jealously guard all of our Constitutional rights, especially the People's privacy rights under the Fourth Amendment.</sarc>
Any bill that obama shows indication of signing should be halted the second that becomes known.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.